Governing Education through Data and Digital Devices: An Analysis of the MEQ Education Dashboard

Main Article Content

Judicaël Alladatin

Abstract

This article analyzes the Education Dashboard developed by the Québec Ministry of Education (MEQ) in a context where digital data are playing an increasingly prominent role in school governance. It draws on insights from the sociology of quantification, critical data studies, and the theory of public policy instruments. The analysis is based on a qualitative, documentary, and interface-centered approach, complemented by an examination of the strategic documents framing the dashboard. The findings show that the dashboard privileges a representation of the education system centered on narrowly measurable dimensions, such as graduation, performance on ministerial examinations, enrolment, and resources, while relegating pedagogical processes, actual educational work, and local contexts to the background. They also highlight the structuring role of comparability, the risks of implicit rankings, and a tendency toward the symbolic recentralization of educational steering through data. The findings further indicate that, despite the heterogeneity of reference dates and data consolidation statuses, the dashboard interface tends to present these data as synchronous and comparable, thereby contributing to the naturalization of their timeliness and reliability, both of which remain open to question.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Alladatin, J. (2026). Governing Education through Data and Digital Devices: An Analysis of the MEQ Education Dashboard. Mediations and Mediatizations, (24), 220–236. https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi24.551
Section
Research articles

References

Ball, S. J. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093022000043065 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093022000043065

Beer, D. (2019). The data gaze: Capitalism, power and perception. SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526463210

Boutigny, F. (2021). La compétence empêchée : étude en immersion dans une industrie de process sur l'organisation du travail et ses invisibles dysfonctionnements qui bloquent le pouvoir d'agir du collectif [thèse de doctorat, Université de Strasbourg, France]. HAL Thèses. https://theses.hal.science/tel-04141690v1

Collin, S., et Hennetier, C. (2024). Gouverner l’école à l’heure de l’IA : synthèse des connaissances sur la gouvernance scolaire basée sur les données. Médiations et médiatisations, (18), 43-66. https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi18.412 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52358/mm.vi18.412

Denouël, J., et Granjon, F. (2011). Communiquer à l’ère numérique : figures de la surveillance et de la reconnaissance. CNRS Éditions. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/books.pressesmines.387

Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437186

Desrosières, A. (1993). La politique des grands nombres : histoire de la raison statistique. La Découverte.

Espeland, W. N., et Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113(1), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1086/517897 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/517897

Espeland, W. N., et Sauder, M. (2016). Engines of anxiety: Academic rankings, reputation, and accountability. Russell Sage Foundation.

Espeland, W. N., et Stevens, M. L. (2008). A sociology of quantification. European Journal of Sociology, 49(3), 401-436. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975609000150 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975609000150

Feenberg, A. (2010). Between reason and experience: Essays in technology and modernity. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8221.001.0001

Glaymann, D. (2025). Enseignants-chercheurs : un grand corps malade. Le Bord de l'eau.

Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x

Jarke, J., et Breiter, A. (2019). The datafication of education. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1573833 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1573833

Kamanzi, P. C., Lapointe, P., et Dembélé, M. (2019). The Implementation of Results-Based Management in Quebec: Between School Principals’ Optimism and Teachers’ SkepticismLa mise en œuvre de la gestion axée sur les résultats au Québec. Revue suisse de sociologie, 45(3), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.2478/sjs-2019-0020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sjs-2019-0020

Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473909472

Lapointe, P., et Brassard, A. (2018). La conciliation des pressions internes et externes dans la mise en œuvre de la gestion axée sur les résultats par des directions d’établissement d’enseignement. Éducation et francophonie, 46I(1), 161-177. https://doi.org/10.7202/1047141ar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1047141ar

Lascoumes, P., et Le Galès, P. (2004). Gouverner par les instruments. Presses de Sciences Po. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/scpo.lasco.2005.01.0357

Light, B., Burgess, J., et Duguay, S. (2016). The walkthrough method: An approach to the study of apps. New Media & Society, 20(3), 881-900. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816675438 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816675438

Lingard, B. (2011). Policy as numbers: Ac/counting for educational research. The Australian Educational Researcher, 38(4), 355-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-011-0041-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-011-0041-9

Maroy, C. (2021). L’école québécoise à l’épreuve de la gestion axée sur les résultats : sociologie de la mise en œuvre d’une politique néo-libérale. Presses de l’Université Laval. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9782763738352

Maroy, C., Brassard, A., Mathou, C., Vaillancourt, S., et Voisin, A. (2017). La co-construction de la gestion axée sur les résultats. McGill Journal of Education, 52(1), 93-113. https://doi.org/10.7202/1040806ar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1040806ar

Maroy, C., et Voisin, A. (2017). Accountability. Dans A. Van Zanten (dir.), Dictionnaire de l’éducation (nouvelle éd., p. 1-4). Presses universitaires de France.

Marres, N. (2012). The redistribution of methods: On intervention in digital social research, broadly conceived. The Sociological Review, 60(1), 139-165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02121.x

Marres, N., et Gerlitz, C. (2015). Interface methods: Renegotiating relations between digital research, STS and sociology. The Sociological Review, 64(1), 21-46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12314

Mennicken, A., et Espeland, W. N. (2019). What’s new with numbers? Sociological approaches to the study of quantification. Annual Review of Sociology, 45, 223-245. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041343 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041343

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., et Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE.

Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (2017). Politique de la réussite éducative. Gouvernement du Québec.

Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (2023). Plan stratégique 2023-2027. Gouvernement du Québec.

Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (2024, 19 mars). Modernisation du réseau de l’éducation : un nouveau tableau de bord pour appuyer le réseau scolaire. Gouvernement du Québec. https://www.quebec.ca/nouvelles/actualites/details/modernisation-du-reseau-de-leducation-un-nouveau-tableau-de-bord-pour-appuyer-le-reseau-scolaire-54400

Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques (2020). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en

Pollitt, C., et Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis (4e éd.). Oxford University Press.

Porter, T. M. (1996). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400821617

Rhoten, D., Carnoy, M., Chabran, M., et Elmore, R. (2003). The conditions and characteristics of assessment and accountability: The case of four states. Dans M. Carnoy, R. Elmore et L. Siskin (dir.), The new accountability: High schools and high stakes testing (p. 13-54). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203465639

Rogers, R. (2013). Digital methods. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8718.001.0001

Voisin, A. (2024). Instruments d’accountability et équité scolaire dans les systèmes éducatifs d’Europe et du Canada : analyse du PISA 2012. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 47(2), 438-465. https://doi.org/10.53967/cje-rce.5513 DOI: https://doi.org/10.53967/cje-rce.5513

Williamson, B. (2017). Big data in education: The digital future of learning, policy and practice. SAGE Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714920